Piercy v. Piercy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Piercy v. Piercy

97 A.D.2d 972, 468 N.Y.S.2d 772, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20807

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 4, 1983·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously modified and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Special Term properly granted the motion to withdraw by plaintiff’s counsel. Both plaintiff and defendant’s counsel were aware that the request would be made in open court (see CPLR 321, subd [b], par 2) and did not object to the relief sought. Special Term also properly directed defendant to pay plaintiff $1,000 in appraisal fees which were reasonable and necessary for the maintenance of plaintiff’s divorce action. Special [973] Term erred, however, in awarding counsel fees. The undated, unsigned, and unsworn schedule of services submitted did not constitute the documentation required to support the award (see Baecher v Baecher, 80 AD2d 629, 630; cf. Durward v Durward, 92 AD2d 746). Counsel, of course, may make an application for an award of counsel fees on appropriate papers. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Bayger, J. — divorce — attorney’s fees.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Green and Moule, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously modified and, as modified, affirmed, without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Special Term properly granted the motion to withdraw by plaintiff’s counsel. Both plaintiff and defendant’s counsel were aware that the request would be made in open court (see CPLR 321, subd [b], par 2) and did not object to the relief sought. Special Term also properly directed defendant to pay plaintiff $1,000 in appraisal fees which were reasonable and necessary for the maintenance of plaintiff’s divorce action. Special [973] Term erred, however, in awarding counsel fees. The undated, unsigned, and unsworn schedule of services submitted did not constitute the documentation required to support the award (see Baecher v Baecher, 80 AD2d 629, 630; cf. Durward v Durward, 92 AD2d 746). Counsel, of course, may make an application for an award of counsel fees on appropriate papers. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Bayger, J. — divorce — attorney’s fees.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Green and Moule, JJ.

Piercy v. Piercy, 97 A.D.2d 972, 468 N.Y.S.2d 772, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20807 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

97 A.D.2d 972 (Piercy v. Piercy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related